ISRAEL DENIES INVOLVEMENT IN ARAFAT’S MURDER

The issue of the mysterious death of Yasser Arafat resurficed at the Fatah Conference being held this week. One report states…

As Fateh’s conference, held in the West Bank city of Bethlehem, entered its second day, delegates participating in the conference criticized the movement’s leadership for not demanding an investigation into the death of late President, Yasser Arafat, and slammed it for not insisting on it.

Last month, the Ramallah office of AlJazeera was closed down by the Palestinian Authority for covering a press conference regarding this matter.

Now we see Israel denying any involvement in the death. Is this assasination going to join the list of so many others? Will we ever really know who killed President John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr. and Yasser Arafat? So far, all we are hearing are denials from all the assumed gulty parties. Below is the latest denial from Israel.

Arafat murder conspiracy is back from the dead

By Avi Isaacharoff and Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondents

The mystery surrounding the 2004 death of Yasser Arafat, at the Percy military hospital near Paris, continues to hover over Fatah and the Palestinian Authority. The sixth Fatah convention on Thursday made no official decision about his death. But more than 2,000 delegates rose to applaud the late leader’s nephew Nasser al-Kidwa, former PLO ambassador to the UN, when he demanded the congress officially denounce Israel for being behind the “assassination” of the late PA chairman.

The affair resurfaced in the Palestinian discourse a few weeks ago in the wake of accusations by PLO enfant terrible Farouk Kaddoumi, head of the organization’s state department. Kaddoumi accused Arafat’s successor, PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas and PA senior official Mohamed Dahlan, of conspiring with Israel to murder Arafat.

This accusation is groundless. Even if one believes the allegations against Israel, the thought that then-prime minister Ariel Sharon enlisted senior Palestinian figures to plot against Arafat defies all reason. But Kaddoumi’s accusations were enough to ignite a lively argument in the Arab world, and al-Kidwa’s declaration Thursday fell on fertile ground.

None of the speakers at the Fatah congress had any new information on this issue. Al-Kidwa, who has a copy of the French hospital report on the circumstances of his uncle’s death, has admitted that his accusations against Israel are based on assumptions he cannot prove.

Fatah’s non-decision is not expected to affect Israel’s relations with the PA. The sides have considerable differences, first and foremost the final status arrangement and the construction in the settlements. Thursday’s announcement should be seen as lip service to Arafat’s memory that will yield no practical implications, not even an inquiry commission.

The official hospital report on Arafat’s death appeared in Haaretz in September 2005. The report rejects almost completely the possibility of poisoning (which Kaddoumi and al-Kidwa alluded to). On the other hand, it does not specify a definite cause of illness. Israeli doctors who read the report were surprised that nowhere in its hundreds of pages did it mention the possibility that Arafat had contracted HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. After all, the report described symptoms that could characterize AIDS, and many people close to Arafat presumed he had the disease. The findings also suggest a bacterial infection in the digestive system from spoiled food.

But the report reaches no final conclusions. Instead of spreading unfounded accusations, Fatah leaders should simply publish it in full so that the Palestinian public can read it and judge for itself.

The need for more and more conspiracy theories is astounding. First, and quite importantly, Yasser Arafat was about 75 years old at the time of his death – he was born in 1929 – why are circumstances around his death, by virtue of it being ‘untimely’ according to some of his adherents ‘unnatural’? Some theories speak of the possibility that Arafat had been infected with the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (aka HIV), or that he had full blown AIDS – both theories based on the bruising that was manifesting itself before and during the time he entered the coma state that ultimately ended with his death. This ‘bruising’ condition led the doctors in France to diagnose a condition known as Idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) which results in (you guessed it) – BRUISING – because of the low platelet count.

Was it not the choice of the family for Arafat not to have an autopsy? Having spent more than 24 hours in the hospital before his death it was legal for the attending physician to certify the cause of death without the need for further examination through an invasive examination and, as far as I am aware, in the Muslim tradition, autopsies are not exactly welcome within the community.

As Arafat`s nephew admitted, `hiss accusations against Israel are based on assumptions he cannot prove.`

Peter….
Regarding Arafat’s family chosing not to have an autopsy…. you forget the millions of dollars that his wife, Suha, was reciving from the Palestinian Authority to maintain her lavish standard of living. Do you think she was prepared to give that up?

Can you ever fully understand the motivations of an individual? What about the communication that went on between Suha and Yasser when they were together, in private – many people do discuss the issue surrounding what they want to happen if and when one dies and the other survives. Arafat, being decades older than his wife, would certainly have been cognizant of the fact that there was a great likelihood of his predeceasing his wife (even without considering the possibility of death by assassination or other military intervention). I’m sure that during their private times together these issues would have been discussed – as well as the issue of what would become of Suha after Arafat’s death.

Besides, when you consider the fact that Arafat’s illness, hospitalization and death all took place in France – under the supervision of medical care – it seems even less likely that there could be anything untoward about his death. For crying out loud – here was a 75 year old who MORE than looked his age, he could have passed himself off as someone who was 85 or 90. There was nothing ‘robust’ looking about Arafat – every time I’ve seen an image of him from the news in the past ten years (before his death, of course) I always thought that he looked terrible. Was it the strain of his battles against Zionism? Was it the burden of the murders that he had ordered to avenge the deaths of Palestinians that aged him so? One begins to wonder if being a merchant of death doesn’t carry a certain cost to the very flesh itself; each act taking away from your humanity and your life until, at some point, you develop some dread disease and … you die.

Finally, why should the Palestinian Authority continue to pay Suha anything? She is entitled to Arafat’s estate, but not money that the Palestinian Authority should be using to improve the livelihood of their people – that is abominable and reprehensible. But, as with many things, that is a different story … Unless – perhaps Arafat was murdered so that Suha could continue to have her extravagant lifestyle paid for by the PA – maybe Arafat had given her the boot and she was afraid of loosing it all … that might be it – Suha killed him! She has it all – motive and opportunity – and, you know, statistically, women tend to use poison to kill more than any other way – that’s the final part of the puzzle: means, motive and opportunity. 1st Degree Murder all the way, folks.

Now I’ve gone and done it … Suha … assassin or spurned lover? You decide.

firstcasualty said,

“This accusation is groundless. Even if one believes the allegations against Israel, the thought that then-prime minister Ariel Sharon enlisted senior Palestinian figures to plot against Arafat defies all reason”

It does? Abbas is in power now and the complete lapdog of the west and israel. I would not be surprised at all if this was proven.